On 1/23/07, Ed Leafe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 23, 2007, at 4:23 PM, Nate Lowrie wrote: > > > I agree with Paul on this one. Let's think about it in these terms. > > Suppose Dabo was GPL'd. What Ed is saying is that any program using > > the Dabo Framework would have to be GPL'd as well because it "links" > > to Dabo. What about a massive GPL'd project like Linux then? Sorry > > Ed, your logic just doesn't make sense. > > It's not my logic, and I've expressly stated that I disagree with > it. But it is a position put forward by a fairly major player (MySQL > AB), and has not been shown to be legally incorrect.
Sorry about inferring that it was your logic. I have to laugh at their stance though, because proprietary packages like Java link to GPL'd Linux and use the system libraries yet do not require to be GPL'd. > > > Even if we did distribute MySQL or another GPL'd library or program > > with Dabo, why should all of the program be GPL'd. The FAQ was clear > > that GPL'd and commercial libraries can be put together. > > That's why the LGPL was created: to allow this sort of library > usage. The fact that something GPL and not LGPL is significant. > > -- Ed Leafe > -- http://leafe.com > -- http://dabodev.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > Post Messages to: [email protected] > Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-dev > _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-dev
